Method and apparatus for reducing motor vehicle traffic flow instabilities and increasing vehicle throughput

ABSTRACT

A method and apparatus are disclosed for reducing traffic flow instabilities and increasing vehicle throughput by monitoring the distances and velocities of motor vehicles leading and following a center vehicle and controlling the velocities of the vehicles to maintain a steady relative distance between the center vehicle and the leading and following vehicles. Using distance and speed information derived from both leading and following vehicles reduces the loop gain of feedback needed below one ( 1 ) and diminishes traffic instabilities caused by “car following.”

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation-in-part and claims the benefit ofU.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/903,379 filed, on Oct. 13, 2010,which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No.61/253,611, filed on Oct. 21, 2009, the contents of both of which areincorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

BACKGROUND

Traffic flow instabilities include slowdowns, back-ups, and alternatingwaves of stop-and-go driving, which often appear to occur for no obviousreason such as an accident or road construction work. These periodic andoften rapid variations in speed and traffic density reduce overalltraffic throughput on highways and increase the danger of collisions,cause higher fuel consumption and wear and tear on vehicles, fasterabrasion of roadways, and waste the time and fray the nerves ofmotorists.

Traffic flow instabilities are best understood in light of therelationship between vehicle density and speed. Vehicle density is thenumber of vehicles in a unit length of a roadway and depends on theaverage length of such vehicles and the distance between vehicles.Ideally, drivers will attempt to keep a safe distance from vehicles thatthey are following so that if a lead vehicle were to suddenly apply itsbrakes, the trailing vehicle could apply its brakes in time to avoid acollision. The safe distance depends on speed and reaction time,specificallys _(min) =T×vwhere s_(min) is the minimum safe distance, T is reaction time, and v isspeed. In practice one factors in a margin of safety by using a valuefor T that is considerably larger than the typical reaction time. A wellknown rule of thumb for maintaining a safe minimum distance, forexample, calls for a driver to allow one car length between his vehicleand a leading vehicle for each 10 miles per hour of speed. Hence, amotorist travelling at 60 miles per hour should allow a gap of six carlengths between his vehicle and the vehicle he is following. But, in anycase, what is important here is that the minimum safe distance isproportional to velocity or speed.

In an ideal world, where drivers maintain a safe minimum distancebetween their vehicles and the vehicles they are following during rushhours or other peak driving periods, traffic density should decrease athigher speeds as vehicle spacing increases to maintain a safe minimumdistance. Conversely, traffic density will increase at lower speeds asthe safe minimum distance decreases at lower speeds. Thus, if alldrivers maintain a safe minimum distance from vehicles ahead, trafficdensity (vehicles per unit distance) is inversely proportional to thesum of vehicle length and safe minimum distance, which may be expressedas:=1/(d+T×v)where equals traffic density (vehicles per unit distance) and d is thelength of a vehicle. Vehicle throughput (vehicles passing a fixed pointper unit time) equals density times speed, sor=ν/(d+T×v)where r is the throughput (vehicles per second). Thus, at low speeds,throughput is approximately proportional to speed orr□v/d (for v<d/T).

However, even though throughput increases with speed, it does so moreand more slowly as speed increases, and throughput approaches anasymptotic value ofr _(max)=1/Twhen v becomes large. If one conservatively assumed total reaction timeto be one second, for example, throughput would be ultimately limited toone vehicle per second (or 3600 vehicles per hour per lane).

Unfortunately, in the real world, traffic throughput is not steadyduring peak driving periods, in part because many drivers do notconsistently maintain safe minimum distances. For example, some driverstailgate or switch lanes precipitously and then reduce their speed toavoid a collision or to establish a safe minimum distance; other driversattempt to maintain a minimum distance that is less than safe; finally,other drivers maintain a minimum distance that is longer or greater thanoptimum and cause trailing vehicles to reduce the gap between vehicles.In all of these events, when vehicle density is above a certain level,the application of the brakes of one vehicle to avoid a collision or toestablish a safer minimum distance will cause a cascade effect as eachfollowing driver applies his or her brakes to compensate for thereduction in the speed of the leading vehicle. Thus, a wave travelsbackward through the traffic, with amplitude increasing with distancefrom the original disturbance.

These waves or instabilities increase traffic density because lowerspeed causes higher densities, and higher densities cause even lowerspeeds. Indeed, because of this positive feedback, waves in density andspeed grow in amplitude until the speed at the low point of the cycledrops to zero and traffic is brought to a standstill. The overallthroughput in the presence of these wavelike disturbances of trafficflow is much lower than would be possible with steady flow in partbecause the average speed is much lower.

Another way of understanding the source of traffic flow instabilities isto consider each driver and vehicle combination as a control system (ora controlled vehicle) that adjusts speed in response to the relativeposition of a vehicle ahead or leading vehicle, as well as the relativespeed of the leading vehicle. Each driver and vehicle can be thought ofas a system with an input (the relative position and speed of theleading vehicle) and an output (acceleration or deceleration, and hence,indirectly, speed and position of the controlled vehicle itself). Such acontrol system can be said to have a “gain” which is the ratio ofamplitude of the output to that of the input. If, for example, thecontrol system is able to accurately follow the input, then it has gainof one. It is well known in the art of control systems that, if thereexists any motion waveform that is amplified with a gain of more thanone by the control system, even if only by a small amount, thencascading many such control systems leads to increasing amplitudes ofdeviation from the average the further back one goes from the initialdisturbance.

So, if there is a frequency of oscillation for which the amplitude ofthe oscillations at the output of a control system is larger than it isat its input, there will be a problem when many such systems arecascaded. That is, if the systems have gain greater than one for wavesof some frequency, then, when multiplied together, these gains producelarger and larger overall gain, as more and more systems are cascaded.For stability, the gains need to be strictly less than one for allfrequencies. In other words, the amplitude of the response to adisturbance needs to be less than the amplitude of the disturbanceitself.

Yet, vehicles also cannot successfully avoid collisions when there arelarge amplitude oscillations, unless the gain is higher than one at somefrequencies. For example, when a leading vehicle periodically speeds upand slows down it will alternately be ahead of, and then behind, whereit would have been if it had moved with a steady velocity equal to itsaverage velocity. The maximum departure from the average position iscalled the amplitude of the oscillation.

If the gain of the control system of a vehicle following a controlledvehicle is one, then the following vehicle will reproduce exactly thesame increases and decreases in velocity (ignoring delay in the controlsystem for the moment) and hence the same departures from the averageposition. In this case, the separation between the two vehicles isconstant and no collision can occur.

However, if the gain of the control system of the following vehicle isless than one, the following vehicle, while still reproducing the motionof the leading vehicle, will do so with reduced amplitude. The twovehicles will collide if the difference in amplitude between theirmotions exceeds their initial separation. This is most easily seen whenthe gain is zero; that is, when the following vehicle moves at fixedspeed. In that case, as the amplitude of the oscillation of the leadingvehicle is increased, a point is reached where the leading vehicle lagsso far behind its average position that it drops back to where thefollowing vehicle currently is. When the gain is non-zero, the followingvehicle's oscillation will tend to reduce the chance of collision for afixed amplitude of oscillation, but there will still be some amplitudefor which collision is unavoidable.

Overall then, it appears that the control system gain cannot be greaterthan one, and yet cannot be less than one for safe operation under allconditions. Thus, the problem of traffic flow instability is simplyunavoidable when the driver and vehicle are modeled as a simple “carfollowing” control system.

Further, it is also well known in the art of control systems that anydelay in a feedback loop can lead to instabilities. Thus the finitereaction time of a driver (and the dynamics of the vehicle and itscontrol system) plays a role in producing instabilities. Shorterreaction times allow higher throughput, because they allow theseparation between vehicles to be smaller, but for any given reactiontime there will be a critical density above which perturbations areamplified and will propagate. Further, the components of adriver/vehicle control system model are non-linear because speed cannotbecome negative or exceed some upper limit, and the distance betweenvehicles cannot become negative either. These non-linearities, alongwith positive feedback, create the classic conditions for instabilitiesor even chaotic behavior.

The above is but one way of understanding the origins of traffic flowinstabilities. Many different models have been made of traffic flowusing mathematical tools such as differential equations, differenceequations, cellular automata, fluid flow models, particle tracking, andso-called “car following” models. All show travelling waves ofinstabilities and amplification of these waves above some criticaldensity. None, however, suggest a solution to the problem.

Because the incidence of large density and speed fluctuations increasewith traffic flow density, one approach to the problem is to reducetraffic density by building more roads or more lanes per road. More roadconstruction would certainly help reduce density, but it is not a viableoption in many cases in view of land use restrictions or inadequatefinancing.

Limiting or “metering” roadway access at entry points at or below sometarget value also certainly helps to reduce traffic density, but itforces roadways to operate well below their maximum carrying capacity.

Another approach would be to reduce driver reaction time to allowvehicles to follow each other more closely at higher speeds withoutdanger of collision by eliminating the standard arrangement ofaccelerator and brake pedal, which unnecessarily lengthens reaction timebecause the foot has to be lifted from one and applied to the other. Itis unlikely, however, that the standard brake and gas pedal design willever be replaced.

An automated control system, somewhat analogous to cruise control, usingautomatic feedback based on sensor readings can reduce “reaction time.”But, as pointed out above, there is still a critical density above whichinstabilities occur. In addition, vehicles with such automated controlmay cause further instabilities when mixed with vehicles controlled bydrivers, because the automated vehicles—with faster reaction times—willappear to be “tail gating” at uncomfortably close range.

Fully automated control systems with high speed communication betweenvehicles can allow a lead vehicle to directly control several followingvehicles that travel together in “platoons” much as the engine of atrain controls the motion of attached carriages. However, such anapproach is best suited for a separate road system limited to platoonsof fully automated vehicles. It is unlikely to be safe in a mixedenvironment with some vehicles controlled by human drivers. Thus, thisapproach would either require duplicating existing infrastructure orforcing all vehicles to be converted to completely automatic operation.There are also complex issues concerning the formation of platoons, andhow they would enter and exit a highway, or change lanes.

Suggestions for automatic “distance keeping” by a following vehicle withreference to a leading vehicle date at least to the work of Dr. IchiroMasaki (U.S. Pat. No. 4,987,357). His automobile cruise-control systemuses machine vision technology to automatically adjust a controlledvehicle's speed to keep a safe distance from a leading vehicle.

All such suggestions for “adaptive cruise control” rely on informationabout a leading vehicle, typically the distance to that vehicle and thedifference in speed between the leading and the controlled vehicle. Atraditional “car following” control system is illustrated in FIG. 1where the controlled vehicle ‘C’ takes as input the distance to theleading vehicle ‘L’ (d₁), and the relative speed of the leading vehicle(v₁−v_(c)). A car following system may also have additional inputs, suchas the speed of the controlled vehicle v_(c) itself, as well asparameters that control the operation of the controlled vehicle, such asthe desired speed v_(des) and a maximum allowed speed v_(max) asdepicted in FIG. 2a . As shown in FIG. 2a , a car following controlsystem outputs a positive acceleration command a, or a negativeacceleration command a, to the drive control system in order to speed upor slow down respectively. The control system could alternatively, forexample, output a speed set point for the drive control system, oractivate mechanical brakes and/or a regenerative braking system.

Importantly, the information flow in a “car following” system isstrictly one-way: from leading to controlled vehicle, or in other wordsfrom front to back. The controlled vehicle's speed is adjusted based oninformation of the relative position and speed of the vehicle in frontof it. Only the leading vehicle influences what is behind it. There isno information propagating forward from the following vehicle.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, a vehiclecontrol system and method is provided in a center vehicle that relies oninformation concerning a vehicle in front of the center vehicle and oninformation concerning a vehicle behind the center vehicle to controlthe forward motion of the center vehicle. In accordance with anotheraspect of the present invention, every vehicle, or most vehicles, on theroad are provided with the vehicle control system in accordance with thepresent invention.

In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, a vehicle havinga current speed sensor, a driver input and a mechanism to controlforward motion of the vehicle, includes a vehicle controller systemsecured in the vehicle, the vehicle controller system receiving inputsfrom the current speed sensor and the driver input and providing anoutput to the mechanism to control forward motion of the vehicle and oneor more leading distance sensors, one or more leading speed sensors, oneor more following distance sensors, and one or more following speedsensors. Each of the sensors has an output that is provided to thevehicle controller system. The vehicle controller system provides theoutput to the mechanism to control forward motion of the vehicle as afunction of the input from the current speed sensor, of the output fromthe one or more leading distance sensors, of the output of the one ormore leading speed sensors, of the output of the one or more followingdistance sensors, and of the output of the one or more following speedsensors.

In accordance with another aspect of the present invention. the inputsfrom the driver input to the vehicle controller system can beselectively masked. Conversely, the driver may override the automatedsystem when desired.

In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, thevehicle controller system provides an output to the mechanism to controlforward motion of the vehicle as a function of the outputs of the one ormore leading distance sensors, of the one or more leading speed sensors,of the one or more following distance sensors, of the one or morefollowing speed sensors, and of the current speed sensor.

The vehicle can include a fuel controller and a braking system and thecontroller system can provide output to the fuel controller and to thebraking system.

In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, accelerationinstructions can be provided by the vehicle controller system to themechanism for controlling forward motion according to the function:a=ƒ(k _(d)(d ₁ −d _(f))+k _(v)((v ₁ −v _(c))+(v _(f) −v _(c)))where

a is the acceleration control signal provided to the (controlled)vehicle by the vehicle controller system;

d₁ is the distance of a first (leading) vehicle in front of thecontrolled vehicle;

d_(f) is the distance of a second (following) vehicle behind thecontrolled vehicle;

v₁ is the speed of the first (leading) vehicle;

v_(c) is the speed of the (controlled) vehicle;

v_(f) is the speed of the second (following) vehicle;

ƒ( . . . ) is a selected monotonic function; and

k_(d) and k_(v) are gain factors.

The transfer function ƒ( . . . ) may simply be the identity function(i.e. ƒ(x)=x) or may, for example, have a sigmoidal shape such as thehyperbolic trigonometric tangent or “tanh” function, in order to limitextremes in acceleration and deceleration.

Other functions that can be used include:a=ƒ(k _(d)(d ₁ −d _(f))+k _(v)((v ₁ −v _(c))+(v _(f) −v _(c)))+k _(c)(v_(des) −v _(c)))where

a is the acceleration control signal provided to the (controlled)vehicle by the vehicle controller system;

d₁ is the distance of a first (leading) vehicle in front of the vehicle;

d_(f) is the distance of a second (following) vehicle behind thevehicle;

v₁ is the speed of the first (leading) vehicle;

v_(c) is the speed of the (controlled) vehicle;

v_(f) is the speed of the second (following) vehicle;

v_(des) is the desired speed of the vehicle;

ƒ( . . . ) is an selected monotonic function; and

k_(d), k_(v) and k_(c) are gain factors.

In accordance with various aspects of the present invention, the one ormore leading distance sensors and the one or more following distancesensors can be selected from the group consisting of radar sensors,lidar sensors, sonar sensors, machine vision sensors, image processingsystems, a binocular stereo imaging system which exploits the parallaxbetween images obtained using two spatially separated cameras,trinocular stereo systems and monocular systems.

In accordance with other aspects of the present invention, the speedsensors can be selected from the group of radar, lidar, and sonarsystems that measure Doppler signals, or from machine vision and imageprocessing systems. The speed sensors may be ones that only providerelative speeds, that is the differences in speed (v₁−v_(c)) and(v_(f)−v_(c)).

In accordance with an aspect of the present invention, a method isprovided for controlling a forward motion of a moving vehicle having acurrent speed and a mechanism to control forward motion of the movingvehicle between a moving leading vehicle and a moving following vehicle,comprising: a controller which is secured in the moving vehicledetermining a distance between the moving leading vehicle and the movingvehicle, a relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and themoving vehicle, a distance between the moving following vehicle and themoving vehicle, a relative speed between the moving following vehicleand the moving vehicle and the controller processing the distancebetween the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle, the relativespeed between the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle, thedistance between the moving following vehicle and the moving vehicle andthe relative speed between the moving following vehicle and the movingvehicle to provide an output to control forward motion of the movingvehicle to position the moving vehicle at a desired position between themoving leading vehicle and the moving following vehicle, wherein thedesired position is variable.

In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention a method isprovided, wherein the output of the controller is provided to amechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein the output of the controller is an alertprovided to a driver of the moving vehicle.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, further comprising, the controller suppressingpositive acceleration of the moving vehicle when the current speed isequal to or greater than a maximum allowable speed.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, further comprising the controller determining that abrake light on the moving leading vehicle is on.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein an acceleration of the moving leadingvehicle is provided to the controller.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein an acceleration of the moving followingvehicle is provided to the controller.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein at least the moving following vehicle andthe moving leading vehicle apply a bilateral control method.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein the desired position is based on a minimumsafe separation of vehicles.

In accordance with yet a further aspect of the present invention amethod is provided, wherein the vehicles are airplanes.

In accordance with another aspect of the present invention a system isprovided to control a forward motion of a moving vehicle having amechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle between amoving leading vehicle and a moving following vehicle, comprising avehicle controller system secured in the moving vehicle, the vehiclecontroller system is configured to perform the following stepsdetermining a distance between the moving leading vehicle and the movingvehicle, a relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and themoving vehicle, a distance between the moving following vehicle and themoving vehicle and a relative speed between the moving following vehicleand the moving vehicle and processing the distance between the movingleading vehicle and the controlled moving vehicle, the relative speedbetween the moving leading vehicle and the controlled moving vehicle,the distance between the moving following vehicle and the controlledmoving vehicle and the relative speed between the moving followingvehicle and the moving vehicle to provide an output to control forwardmotion of the moving vehicle to position the moving vehicle at a desiredposition between the moving leading vehicle and the moving followingvehicle, wherein the desired position is variable.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein the output of the controller is provided to themechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein the output of the controller is an alert providedto a driver of the moving vehicle.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, further comprising, the controller suppressing positiveacceleration when the current speed is equal to or greater than amaximum allowable speed.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, further comprising: the controller determining that a brakelight on the moving leading vehicle is on.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein an acceleration of the moving leading vehicle isprovided to the controller.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein an acceleration of the moving following vehicle isprovided to the controller.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein at least the moving following vehicle and themoving leading vehicle include a bilateral control system.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein the desired position is based on a minimum safeseparation of vehicles.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein the vehicles are airplanes.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention a systemis provided, wherein a relative speed of the moving leading vehicle isbased on information provided by a wireless device on the moving leadingvehicle to a wireless device on the moving vehicle, and wherein therelative speed of the moving following vehicle is based on informationprovided by a wireless device on the moving following vehicle to thewireless device on the moving vehicle.

The present invention also contemplates various methods of controllingthe forward motion of the vehicle as described herein.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates three vehicles, from left to right: a followingvehicle ‘F,’ a controlled vehicle ‘C,’ and a leading vehicle ‘L’.

FIG. 2a illustrates a traditional “car following” control system basedon the difference in the distance between the controlled vehicle and aleading vehicle as well as the differences in their speeds, withoptional additional inputs, such as the speed of the controlled vehicle.

FIG. 2b illustrates an exemplary control system of the invention usingbilateral feedback from leading and following vehicles to the controlledvehicle.

FIG. 3 illustrates a mechanical/spring/damper system that is an analogof the bilateral control system of the invention.

FIG. 4 illustrates an embodiment of the invention employing means formeasuring relative positions and speeds of leading and followingvehicles and means for adjusting the rate of forward motion of thecontrolled vehicle which can be deployed inside one or more vehicles.

FIG. 5 is a block diagram of an embodiment of the control system of FIG.4.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The solution to the traffic instability problem is to obtain enoughtotal gain in each vehicle control system to prevent collisions, yetavoid a gain greater than one in any individual pathway from an input toan output. To achieve this, the control system takes into account notonly the position and speed of a leading vehicle, but also the positionand speed of a following vehicle. In other words, the control system isbased on bilateral feedback using information that flows in bothdirections—from back to front and from front to back—and not just fromfront to back. In order to avoid ambiguity, we use the terms, “followingvehicle,” “controlled vehicle,” and “leading vehicle” for three vehiclesfollowing one another as ‘F’, ‘C’, and ‘L’ do in FIG. 1. The focus is onthe control system of the center or “controlled” vehicle. Of course, theleading and following vehicles may also have such control systems, butto avoid ambiguity we focus on the control system of the center or“controlled” vehicle in the description of the invention.

If the gain of the control loop is around ½ when measured from theleading vehicle input and also around ½ when measured from the followingvehicle input, then there is enough overall gain to avoid collisions,but the gain going from front to back or from back to front is less thanone (namely about ½), thus rapidly attenuating any oscillations ortravelling waves going in either direction.

In the simplest version of this system, a center vehicle between aleading vehicle and a following vehicle maintains a position halfwaybetween the leading and following vehicles. As depicted in FIG. 1,traffic flows from left to right. The controlled vehicle ‘C’ follows theleading vehicle ‘L’ and precedes the following vehicle ‘F’. The centeror controlled vehicle ‘C’ is a distance d₁ from the leading vehicle ‘L’,and the following vehicle ‘F’ is a distance d_(f) from the centervehicle ‘C’. The leading vehicle ‘L’ is traveling at speed v₁, thecenter vehicle ‘C’ at speed v_(c), and the following vehicle ‘F’ atspeed v_(f). Unlike the simple car following system, the new bilateralfeedback control system uses the distance d_(f) between the centervehicle and the following vehicle and their difference in speeds(v_(f)−v_(c)), as well as the distance d₁ between the leading vehicleand the center vehicle and the difference in their speeds (v₁−v_(c)) asinputs.

The operation of a system of bilateral feedback control for vehiculartraffic can be illustrated by analogy to a mechanical mass/spring/dampersystem. Such an analogous mechanical system is depicted in FIG. 3 wheresprings S and dampers D are connected between leading, controlled, andfollowing moving masses (representing vehicles) VL, VC, and VF. Thesprings S model adjustment of speed based on distance because, byHooke's law, the force in a spring is proportional to the extension fromits rest length, and by Newton's second law of motion, the acceleration(rate of change of speed) is the force divided by the mass of thevehicle. The dampers or shock absorbers D connecting the vehicles, onthe other hand, model the control proportional to the relativevelocities of the vehicles because the force in a damper is proportionalto the rate of compression or expansion of the damper.

Any movement of a mass in a string of masses (modeling the vehicles)connected one to the next with a spring and a damper (modeling thecontrol systems) will be transmitted along the chain, but will be dampedout along the chain by the mass/spring/damper combination. The dampingmay work better at some frequencies than at others, but there will neverbe any increase in amplitude along the chain. For one thing, in such apurely passive system (i.e. one without active components that couldamplify signals) there is no energy source to support increasingamplitudes of motion.

This physical model does not apply to the “car following” controlsystems described earlier. It may appear at first sight that a springand a damper could model a “car following” control system whereacceleration is proportional to relative distance and relative velocitywith respect to the leading vehicle. But, pursuant to Newton's third lawthat every action has an equal and opposite reaction, the springs anddampers of the bilateral feedback control system exert forces not juston the controlled vehicle, as desired, but also on the leading vehicle.There is nothing comparable to this in the car following model, becausethe driver of the controlled vehicle only pays attention to the leadingvehicle, and the driver of the leading vehicle correspondingly does notpay attention to the controlled vehicle behind. There is no accountingfor the forces generated by a following vehicle in the simple carfollowing system, where the driver does not take the following vehicleinto account.

Bilateral feedback control of vehicular traffic “cools” the motions of agroup of vehicles to ameliorate traffic instabilities. For example, if anumber of vehicles using bilateral feedback control begin with differentinitial velocities and different inter-vehicle spacing, the “damper”part of the control system will dissipate the kinetic and potentialenergy resulting from departures from the average, thus reducing thedifference between individual vehicles motions and the average of thegroup of vehicles. Without outside disturbances, the group of vehiclesasymptotically approaches synchrony. This movement of vehicles subjectedto bilateral feedback control is comparable to the movement of moleculesin a flow of gas. Individual gas molecules move relative to an averagewith a speed that depends on the temperature of the gas, where thehotter the gas the more rapid the relative motion. Dropping thetemperature corresponds to reducing the velocity differences relative tothe overall motion of the group of molecules. As the gas is cooled itmay undergo a phase change, such as changing from gaseous to liquidform. Similarly, a group of vehicles using bilateral feedback controlmay enter a phase in which the vehicles are all travelling atessentially the same speed and the inter-vehicle spaces are essentiallythe same.

Bilateral feedback control differs from the “platoon” system of theprior art because: (i) in at least one embodiment of the presentinvention there is no direct communication between the leading vehicleand a number of following vehicles; (ii) no single driver is in controlof a group of vehicles, (iii) vehicles can easily leave and join thegroup, and (iv) a group of vehicles can react to disturbances and moveto the “cool” equilibrium phase where vehicle velocities andinter-vehicle spacing are nearly the same.

Bilateral feedback control might be implemented merely by training alldrivers to pay attention to following vehicles and to refrain fromfollowing a leading vehicle too closely. Ideally, each driver would betrained to aim to be roughly half way between a leading and a followingvehicle and to aim for a speed roughly half way between the speeds ofthe following and leading vehicles. This simple solution would greatlydamp out traffic flow instabilities, but it would require a largefraction of drivers to adopt this unfamiliar driving mode foreffectiveness. Further, paying attention to a following vehicle wouldtake attention away from the leading vehicle and possibly reduce safety.Also, some drivers are likely to be loath to leave a gap behind aleading vehicle that non-cooperating drivers from other lanes may decideto populate.

Some form of automation or partial automation is preferable, whereinstruments determine the relative position and speed of leading,controlled, and following vehicles and use this information either toautomatically control the acceleration of the vehicle or providesuggestions to the human operator. The sensors may be in the vehicle orin the supporting infrastructure. For example, electronic camerasmounted and aimed forward and aft of a vehicle could be used to estimatedistance and velocity to the nearest leading and following vehicle usingmachine vision methods such as “optical flow,” “time to contact,” andbinocular or trinocular stereo. Laser, ultrasound and radar measurementtechnique could also be used, although more expensive and less able todiscriminate between vehicles in the same lane and those in adjacentlanes.

As depicted in FIG. 4, in another embodiment of the invention a vehicle6 employs means 1 for measuring the relative position of the leadingvehicle in relation to the center vehicle; means 2 for measuring therelative position of the following vehicle in relation to the centervehicle; means 3 for determining how to adjust the forward motion of thecenter, vehicle; and means 4 for adjusting the forward motion of the ofthe center vehicle. Optionally, additional means may be included formeasuring the speed of the vehicles and for enabling supervisory controlinputs from the driver 5. The driver, may, for example, have a choice ofdriving modes rather than needing to provide detailed control. That is,the driver, instead of constantly controlling the accelerator andbrakes, may instead chose between a control mode that is more aggressivein keeping up with traffic, at the cost of more rapid accelerations anddecelerations, or a more mellow mode in which rapid changes in velocityare avoided when possible. The means (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) arepreferably provided in a vehicle (6).

The means (1) and (2) for measuring the relative position of the leadingand following vehicles may include traditional distance measuringmethods such as radar, lidar, or sonar. However, machine vision andimage processing methods provide lower cost solutions. For example,distance can be measured using a binocular stereo system which exploitsthe parallax between images obtained using two spatially separatedcameras. Pairs of cameras can be mounted behind the windshield and therear window or other suitable location on the vehicle and may also beused for other purposes. Trinocular stereo systems require a thirdcamera, but in turn reduce the computational complexity of determiningmatches between images from the cameras. Finally, even monocular systemsusing a single camera can be used to estimate distance based on the sizeof the image of the leading and following vehicles. Specifically,D=S×ƒ/p,where D is the distance to the vehicle, S the assumed size of thevehicle, f the principal distance of the optical system (focal length)and p the measured size of the image of the vehicle. Such monocularsystems require fewer cameras but are not as accurate as binocular ortrinocular systems, since they depend on an accurate estimate of theactual size S of the vehicle.

The means (1) and (2) for measuring the relative position of the leadingand following vehicles may include means for measuring their relativespeed using traditional velocity measuring techniques based on, forexample, the Doppler effect on radar, lidar, or sonar signals.Alternatively, relative speed can be estimated from measurements ofrelative distance at two different times. Machine vision and imageprocessing systems can provide lower cost methods for determiningrelative speed as well. The speed can, for example, be determined bydividing the known distance between vehicles by the estimated “time tocontact” (TTC) that is,v=D/Twhere v is the speed, D the distance and T the time to contact. The timeto contact is the ratio of distance to speed. It can be estimated frommeasurements of the size of the vehicle image at two different times.Specifically,T=s ₁×(t ₂ −t ₁)/(s ₂ −s ₁),where T is the time to contact, while s₁ and s₂ are the measured imagesizes at times t₁ and t₂ respectively. Note that this expression for thetime to contact does not require knowledge of vehicle size, distance, oreven the focal length f of the camera (and so can be used withuncalibrated cameras).

More sophisticated methods for determining the time to contact exploitimage brightness gradients, that is, derivatives of brightness withrespect to the two spatial image dimensions and with respect to time.One such method determines time to contact directly (see, e.g. Horn, B.K. P., Y. Fang & I. Masaki, “Time to Contact Relative to a PlanarSurface,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, June2007); another first determines the “focus of expansion” (FOE) (see e.g.McQuirk, I. S., B. K. P. Horn, H.-S. Lee, and J. L. Wyatt, “Estimatingthe Focus of Expansion in Analog VLSI,” International Journal ofComputer Vision, July 1998). Such gradient-based methods typicallyproduce more accurate results than methods based on estimates of thesize of images of objects. Still other alternatives are available, somebased on the so-called “optical flow” (see e.g. Horn, B. K. P. and S.Negandaripour, “Direct Passive Navigation,” IEEE Transactions on PatternAnalysis and Machine Intelligence, January 1987).

The means (3) for determining suitable inputs for the mechanismcontrolling forward motion may use analog circuitry and/or digitalcomputation, and may, for example, be implemented in electronic,hydraulic, or pneumatic form. If in digital form, the circuitry may, forexample, be in discrete component form, or ASIC (Application SpecificIntegrated Circuit) or FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array). Thedescription of the circuitry hardware may be in some HDL (HardwareDescription Language) such as Verilog. Alternatively, the control systemmay be implemented as an algorithm in a general purpose computer such asa microprocessor with suitable software or firmware. The control systemdetermines what changes in vehicle forward motion to request based oninputs from the systems measuring relative vehicle position and speed.

In the simplest case, the vehicle acceleration is made proportional to aweighted sum of the difference between the distance to the leading andthe following vehicles and the sum of the relative speed of the leadingand following vehicles with respect to that of the controlled vehicle.More sophisticated control schemes are possible which take into accountthe legal speed limit, the driver's preferences, and signals fromroadside traffic alert systems. Positive acceleration can, for example,be “vetoed” when the current speed is already near the legal limit.Optionally, additional inputs (5) may be provided to the vehicle controlsystem (3). These may include the current speed of the vehicle itself,the legal speed limit, and a desired speed range set by the driver ofthe vehicle. The speed of the vehicle may be determined directly fromwheel rotation or using “fifth wheel” technology, using, for example,the Doppler effect on radar signals reflected from the pavement.

The means (4) for adjusting the forward motion of the vehicle may beaccomplished by controlling engine output by, for example, adjusting thesupply of air and/or fuel to the engine, and/or by controlling thebraking mechanism. The means (4) for adjusting the forward motion of thevehicle may also be based on existing cruise control mechanisms. Thesecan be used directly by changing the desired speed input setting to thesystem. For more flexible control, existing “fly by wire” systems, asfound in some vehicles equipped for use by handicapped drivers, can beused. Fly by wire system are commercially available and were used, forexample, in vehicles of the DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects)“Grand Challenge” and “Urban Challenge” competitions. Control in thecase of vehicles propelled by electrical motors is even simpler. In thiscase, the motor torque is directly proportional to the motor current,and the acceleration of the vehicle in turn is proportional to motortorque. Reversing the direction of current flow reverses the torque andprovides for controlled deceleration as well as acceleration.

FIG. 5 is a partial block diagram of one embodiment of the automaticvehicle control system (3) illustrated in FIG. 4. Four subtractorscompute four differences of inputs, which can then be multiplied byselectable gain factors and added to arrive at an overall accelerationcommand a. The gain factor k_(d) multiplies the difference between thedistance to the leading vehicle and the following vehicle. Thiscomponent of the control signal produces acceleration outputs that tendto equalize these two distances, and to position the center vehicle inthe middle between the leading and the following vehicles.

The gain factor k_(v) multiplies the sum of the relative speeds of theleading and following vehicles relative to the center vehicle. Thiscomponent of the control signal has the important function of dampingout oscillations and adjusting the speed of the center vehicle to beclose to the average of the speeds of the leading and followingvehicles. The gain factor k_(c) multiplies the difference between theactual speed and the desired speed v_(des). This component of thecontrol signal tends to bring the speed closer to the desired speed.This component may be enabled in some embodiments only when there is noleading vehicle or when there is no leading or following vehiclesbecause there is then no control input from leading or followingvehicles.

Positive acceleration outputs can be suppressed by the “veto” box marked‘x’ when the actual speed is equal to or greater than the maximum speed,that is, when (v_(c)−v_(max))□0. The gain factors k_(d), k_(v), andk_(c) can be chosen empirically, analytically, or based on simulationresults, to achieve smooth stable control. Suitable values of theseconstants will depend on such factors as the weight of the vehicle andthe responsiveness of the engine and brake control. In practiceadditional functions may be implemented in the control system, such asoverall changes to the control behavior when there is no leading vehicleand/or no following vehicle. In this case, the vehicle control canrevert to a simple cruise control system that attempts to maintain astable speed at or below the legal limit.

In one automatic embodiment of the invention, the bilateral feedbackcontrol system attempts to maintain the controlled or center vehicleabout halfway between the leading vehicle and the following vehicle.Many variations on this basic scheme are conceivable, for example, theaimed-for position may be other than right in the middle between thevehicle ahead and the vehicle behind. When the average speed of leadingand following vehicles is far below the legal limit, for example, thenthe controlled vehicle may aim for a position somewhat ahead of thecenter. Conversely, when the average speed of leading and followingvehicles is higher than the speed desired by the driver of thecontrolled vehicle, then the system may aim for a position somewhatbehind the center. There would also be additional control rules thattake into account minimum safe separation, relative speeds, speedlimits, weather and lighting conditions, traffic density and trafficadvisories. Special rules could deal with the situation when there is infact no vehicle ahead and/or no vehicle behind. The key innovation hereis that information about distance and speed of the vehicle following istaken into account—along with that of the leading vehicle.

In another form of the invention, some indication is given to the driverabout whether it would be beneficial to speed up, slow down, or maintainthe current speed, or suggestions to move up to the vehicle ahead, dropfurther back, and so on. This would leave the driver in control, butprovide damping of the traffic instabilities if a sufficient number ofdrivers pay heed to the signals. A control panel could, for example,have a set of green, orange, and red lights indicating to the driverwhether it would be beneficial to speed up, maintain the current speed,or slow down. An indication may also be provided as an audio signal, atext on a display, any visual signal or a haptic signal. The indicationsignal may be of a binary nature, such as DO or DO NOT ACCELERATE. Theindication signal may also be one of more than two states, indicatingfor instance in three states “brake,” “do nothing,” or “accelerate.” Theindication signal may provide a very specific instruction, such as“accelerate” until a certain speed is achieved. The indication signalmay also instruct a gradual increase or decrease in speed.

If all, or at least most, vehicles have a control system of the instantinvention, traffic will flow smoother at high densities and existingroadways can sustain substantially higher throughputs. Gas consumptionwill be reduced, as will time lost sitting in stop-and-go traffic. Wearand tear on roads, tires and vehicles will be lowered and the incidenceof accidents reduced. The benefits to the community will be enormous,since more traffic can be accommodated without adding to the roadwayinfrastructure.

While some embodiments are illustrated using linear control systems,where the control output is proportional to the sum of the products ofgain factors and inputs, the invention is not restricted to linearcontrol systems, but also encompasses non-linear control systems aswell, including switching mode control and state-space control. Also,the present invention uses distances and relative velocities of leadingand following vehicles, however, other information or measurements canalso be usefully added. For example, information from sensors indicatingwhether the brake lights of the leading care are on or not, or sensorsable to directly determine the accelerations of leading and followingvehicles, in addition to distances and relative velocities can be used.If available, information about vehicles ahead of the leading vehicleand vehicles behind the following vehicle can also be used.

That brake lights are illuminated, can be detected by a camera, whichmay be connected to a processor which is programmed to conduct imageprocessing routines. A camera may be focused on a leading vehicle. In anembodiment of the present invention the processor determines from cameraimages that the leading car has activated the brakes. The processor maydetermine how long the brakes have been activated and determine anaction or recommendation based on the duration of the “brakes on” event.For instance, the brakes may be activated briefly, for instance for aduration of 1 or 2 seconds or at least less than 5 seconds. Based on anactual speed and the duration of “brakes on,” the processor may decidein that condition that the center vehicle should not accelerate. Theprocessor may also decide that the center vehicle should decelerate. A“brakes on” detection combined with a detected rapidly deceleration of aleading vehicle may cause the system on the center vehicle to overridehuman action and activate the brakes on the center vehicle to avoid acollision. Other actions, including increasing deceleration and slowacceleration after a brake light goes out, are contemplated.Accordingly, the “brakes on” detection through a camera provides anadditional input to the system that may be applied to influence thebilateral control and prevent premature action by a driver of a centervehicle. As a consequence, an illumination of a brakelight on a leadingcar may cause a gradual or a sudden adjustment of an acceleration ordeceleration on a center vehicle or may cause a prevention of anacceleration or deceleration of a center vehicle.

Thus, the present invention provides method and apparatus for reducingtraffic flow instabilities using bidirectional information flow so thatinformation from a vehicle in front of a center vehicle and informationfrom a vehicle behind the center vehicle is used to control theoperation of the center vehicle. The method and apparatus can usefeedforward in addition to feedback, that is, bilateral control. Thepresent invention uses information regarding the motion of followingvehicles as well as leading vehicles. The present invention can also usethe acceleration, velocity, relative distances or relative velocity avehicle directly following as well as directly leading the vehicle. Theneeded information can be acquired using electronic cameras andcomputational devices using machine vision methods.

Currently, different efforts are underway to define, standardize and/orimplement methods for communication between vehicles. This includes V2V(Vehicle-to-Vehicle) technology, WAVE (Wireless Access for VehicularEnvironments), DSRC (dedicated short-range communications, a U.S.Department of Transportation project), CALM (Communications,Air-Interface, Long and Medium range), the IEEE 802.11p standard, aswell as existing communication methods such as BlueTooth and WiFi. Inone embodiment of the present invention wireless communication mayaugment, or even replace information from sensors in the controlledvehicle with information from sensors in leading and following vehicles.Such sensors may include wheel rotation pickups for speed, geo-location(GPS) sensors for position as well as velocity, accelerometers, gaspedal and brake position sensors.

In one embodiment of the present invention a network, as formed byBluetooth or WiFi enabled devices on a moving (center) vehicle and aleading and a following vehicle, form an ad hoc network. While thedistances and relative velocities of leading and following vehicles canbe determined using sensors on the moving center vehicle, as describedabove, that information may also be provided by the leading andfollowing vehicles, for instance via the ad hoc network, and by usingalready available sensors, to the processor on the center vehicle.

Besides the communication technologies mentioned above, there are othermobile and wireless methods enabling communication between devices ondifferent moving vehicles that are already available or currently underdevelopment. One is a switched network for cellular phones or satellitephones. Other networks include dedicated short-range communications orDSRC networks. Such networks may include communication withinfrastructure components such as cell phone towers, satellites, androadside transmitters that enable data exchange with servers on anetwork, or with vehicles that are too far away for direct wirelesscommunication from a center vehicle.

Velocity and/or positional information may, for example, be transmittedfrom the leading and following vehicles using radio frequency (RF)communication or visible or infrared light.

In one embodiment of the present invention sensors on the center vehicleare replaced with sensors in the leading and following vehicles. Oneadvantage of this approach is cost reduction, since, for example, avehicle can sense its own velocity directly, with simpler sensors thanthose needed to estimate its velocity from another vehicle. Also, asystem using information conveyed from leading and following vehiclesmay benefit from the potentially higher accuracy and timeliness of theinformation. Such information can be used in place of, or in additionto, information gathered by sensors on the moving vehicle itself.

Another embodiment of the present invention augments the informationfrom sensors on the center vehicle with information from sensors in theleading and following vehicles. One advantage of this approach isrobustness due to redundancy, since the failure of a wireless link doesnot disable the bilateral control system of the center vehicle. If acombination of sensors on the moving vehicles and communication fromleading and following vehicles is used, then a failure of an individualinformation source does not perturb the stability of the overall trafficflow and the suppression of traffic flow instabilities at all.

Importantly, this type of networked communication between neighboringvehicles is different from that used in “platooning”, wherecommunication:

-   (i) is from one leading vehicle to all vehicles in a “platoon”;-   (ii) is one way only, from the leader to the followers in the    “platoon”;-   (iii) is not just to immediate neighbors but also to vehicles    further away.    In contrast, in at least one embodiment of the present invention    there is no direct communication between the leading vehicle and a    number of following vehicles; and communication in the present    invention is two-way, wherein information flows both up stream and    down stream.

Flow instabilities will occur in any situation where control of eachmoving vehicle is based on distance and relative velocity of the leadingvehicle (the so-called “car following” model) and is properly addressedby the bilateral control, disclosed herein. This is not restricted toautomobiles, but applies, for example, to aircraft flying in another'swake, for instance, to save fuel. So far tests of planes “drafting” or“vortex surfing” have been restricted to just pairs of planes, where thesecond plane has considerable fuel savings, but the idea can be extendedto any number of planes flying in the wake of others, much as migratingbirds often do.

The types of flow instabilities described here apply to such systems aswell, and can be suppressed using the same methods of bilateral controlwhich is provided in accordance with one or more aspects of the presentinvention.

In a further embodiment of the present invention each vehicle involvedin bilateral control has an accurate geo-location system such as aGlobal Positioning System (e.g. GPS, GLONASS, or GALILEO) device thatprovides location and change of location with an accuracy in thesub-meter range, preferably in the decimeter range, and more preferablyin the centimeter range. GPS receivers, as part of their normaloperation, provide not only position but also accurate estimates ofvelocity. Each vehicle, or GPS device on a vehicle, has its own uniqueidentifier and is configured to provide, through the wireless network,its GPS data in response to a request, which preferably is an authorizedrequest. For instance, a vehicle control device can opt in toparticipate in bilateral control and is configured to provide relevantdata, such as GPS data, but also other data that is available from oneor more sensors on the vehicle, to a requesting device on anothervehicle and to provide relevant data upon request.

It is known that smart phones and navigation devices contain sensorssuch as GPS sensors. In one embodiment of the present invention thesedevices are configured to provide data via the wireless network toleading and following vehicles. In one embodiment of the presentinvention, a processor on a vehicle with access to a GPS device isconfigured to request GPS and other data from vehicles in itsenvironment and, based on the GPS data, is enabled to determine what theclosest following and leading vehicles are. The processor applies thecollected GPS data to determine the relevant distances, speeds andaccelerations of the surrounding vehicles to determine a desiredposition and/or speed and/or acceleration of the vehicle using thebilateral control as disclosed herein.

In one embodiment of the present invention a center vehicle establisheswireless contact with a directly leading and a directly followingvehicle to determine bilateral position control and no positional orspeed data is required from other vehicles. In a further embodiment ofthe present invention there is wireless data exchange with vehicles thatare not direct neighbors to a center vehicle.

While there have been shown and described fundamental novel features ofthe invention as applied to preferred embodiments thereof, it will beunderstood that various omissions and substitutions and changes in theform and details of the methods and systems illustrated and in itsoperation may be made by those skilled in the art without departing fromthe spirit of the invention. It is the intention, therefore, to belimited only as indicated by the scope of the claims appended hereto.

The invention claimed is:
 1. A method for controlling a forward motion of a moving vehicle having a current speed and a mechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle between a moving leading vehicle and a moving following vehicle, comprising: determining, by a controller which is secured in the moving vehicle, a distance and relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle, a distance and relative speed between the moving following vehicle and the moving vehicle; and the controller processing the distance and relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle, and the distance and relative speed between the moving following vehicle and the moving vehicle, to provide an output to control forward motion of the moving vehicle to position the moving vehicle at a desired position between the moving leading vehicle and the moving following vehicle, wherein the desired position is variable.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the output of the controller is provided to a mechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the output of the controller is an alert provided to a driver of the moving vehicle.
 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising, the controller suppressing positive acceleration of the moving vehicle when the current speed is equal to or greater than a maximum allowable speed.
 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising the controller determining that a brake light on the moving leading vehicle is on.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein an acceleration of the moving leading vehicle is provided to the controller.
 7. The method of claim 1, wherein an acceleration of the moving following vehicle is provided to the controller.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein at least the moving following vehicle and the moving leading vehicle apply the control method of claim
 1. 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the desired position is based on a minimum safe separation of vehicles.
 10. A system to control a forward motion of a moving vehicle having a mechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle between a moving leading vehicle and a moving following vehicle, comprising: a vehicle controller system secured in the moving vehicle that is configured to perform the following steps: determining a distance and relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle, a distance and relative speed between the moving following vehicle and the moving vehicle; and processing the distance and relative speed between the moving leading vehicle and the controlled moving vehicle, and the distance and relative speed between the moving following vehicle and the controlled moving vehicle, to provide an output to control forward motion of the moving vehicle to position the moving vehicle at a desired position between the moving leading vehicle and the moving following vehicle, wherein the desired position is variable.
 11. The system of claim 10, wherein the output of the controller is provided to the mechanism to control forward motion of the moving vehicle.
 12. The system of claim 10, wherein the output of the controller is an alert provided to a driver of the moving vehicle.
 13. The system of claim 10, further comprising, the controller suppressing positive acceleration when the current speed is equal to or greater than a maximum allowable speed.
 14. The system of claim 10, further comprising: the controller determining that a brake light on the moving leading vehicle is on.
 15. The system of claim 10, wherein an acceleration of the moving leading vehicle is provided to the controller.
 16. The system of claim 10, wherein an acceleration of the moving following vehicle is provided to the controller.
 17. The system of claim 10, wherein at least the moving following vehicle and the moving leading vehicle include the system of claim
 10. 18. The system of claim 10, wherein the desired position is based on a minimum safe separation of vehicles.
 19. The system of claim 10, wherein a relative speed of the moving leading vehicle is based on information provided by a wireless device on the moving leading vehicle to a wireless device on the moving vehicle, and wherein the relative speed of the moving following vehicle is based on information provided by a wireless device on the moving following vehicle to the wireless device on the moving vehicle.
 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the information from the controller system on the moving vehicle is augmented by wireless information from the moving leading vehicle and the moving following vehicle.
 21. The system of claim 19, wherein there is no direct communication between the moving leading vehicle and the moving vehicle.
 22. The system of claim 19, wherein there is no direct communication between the moving following vehicle and the moving vehicle.
 23. The system of claim 19, wherein there is wireless data exchange with vehicles that are not direct neighbors to the moving vehicle. 